No, it’s not a crappy new CW sitcom. It’s what a midwestern family has decided to brand themselves as, as they brand their bodies–and those of their kids–with t-shirts from whatever corporate overlord will pay them to do so.

They’re not the first–there is the “I’ll Wear Your Shirt” guy–but they’re making it a family affair! Awwww.

While I understand (and am sensitive to) the fact that this is a real way of making real money here in Late Capitalist USA, I seriously want to vomit when I hear stuff like this. For all of the pissing on service providers (from retail clerks to teachers) and whining that “boo hoo, we don’t make anything in this country anymore!,” we seem to have no compunction when it comes to reducing ourselves to objects in the service of MegaCorp.

Certainly, there are some people (including one junior-high-aged Dorklet) who choose to wear corporate logos–nay, they insist upon it!–and pay for the “privilege,” so maybe getting paid by the corporation for it is a step up.

Or maybe it’s a sign that we are just breaths away from losing our souls and thinking of ourselves first, last, and always, as consumers, or worse: products.

Or maybe it’s a sign that I am a communist crackpot who needs to put on my big-girl, high-end-denim pants with conspicuous pocket-stitching, and give myself over to the pleasure of The Free Market, where even your fetus can shill for a day spa! Wheeee!

9 Responses to “File Under: Signs of the Apocalypse”

I flat out refused to dress our kids in anything that had a conspicuous corporate logo on it when they were little. It may be news to retailers, but we didn’t have kids for the marketing opportunities.

I blame part of it on the economy; who doesn’t want to find a way to make a little extra cash? Still, with the number of things advertising is splattered on — billboards, bumpers, buses, cars wrapped in adverts, T-shirts, uniforms, ballparks — is this really necessary?

I foresee the day we enter the world and have a digital billboard adhered to our foreheads.

I think what bothers me most about this is the fact that the parents are involving their kids (despite that reportedly, the kids don’t want to be left out). It sends the creepy message that you’re “buyable” and/or a product at an age when you’re very impressionable. And it opens up a can or worms about whether or not this little family business experiment will have a lasting impact on the kids’ self-image, self-respect, etc. I wonder, since our society is the way that it is, if the little girl will take away different messages about her self-worth from this experience than her brother(s)? If the family gets really successful, will the parents put more than a normal amount of pressure on the kids to look or behave a certain way? I think that this lifestyle would get pretty restrictive pretty quickly for children in that age range. As if there aren’t enough marketing ploys that target kids… (The sooner we suck out their souls, the sooner we hook them for life! Bwa ha ha ha!)

Boy, proud to be the from the Midwest today.
*eye roll*
What gets me is the irony in that the family is doing this to make money in a tough economic time… so that they get other people to buy crap in a tough economic time. Yeah, yeah, the defense that consumers want honest reports from real live people could hold up, but it still doesn’t negate the fact that the consumerism is this beast that you can ride and handle for a while, but seems to inevitably turn on the owner.